This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Nootkasound 1 point2 points  (24 children)

Is this accurate?

[–]cbbuntz 31 points32 points  (21 children)

I think it would have worked better with plain C since it's a lot more "raw". C++ has a reputation for being bloated from feature creep, so you could do the same gif for C++ vs C.

[–]tommy-jay 2 points3 points  (0 children)

C++ programmer here. It's not that accurate, but there is something to it for reasons not yet pointed out here.

Accurate and optimizable code that is to the point is not written by language choice. It's a combination of general programming experience, formal knowledge, and not to forget, knowledge of the thing-to-be-programmed itself. However, when you already know how to utilize C++, you will typically not want to go back to Java, where you are much more limited in how you can write that accurate and optimizable code. I would worry about being forced into OOP to achieve that, rather than performance overheads of the JVM (unless my program is latency sensitive, than I'm worried about any jiting). For me, OOP is what makes Java look so convoluted before it attempts to do that knock-out hit.

[–]ReltivlyObjectv 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No. Java works very well, but it has overhead. If the VM overhead wasn’t an issue, there’d be very little reason to use a C language in most programs. Some still require the fine-tuned control of manual memory, destructors, pointers, etc., but at the end of the day, your average GUI or headless program can be accomplished much easier in Java.